[regext] Erik Kline's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-04: (with COMMENT)

Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-04: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to h

[regext] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02: (with COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer

Re: [regext] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02

Hi Scott, > Dan, thanks for the review. Would you please give me a little more on > what you think is needed to explain the relationship between the two > documents? I can't think of much more to say beyond "7482 describes > protocol queries" and "7483 describes protocol responses to the queries >

[regext] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-04: (with COMMENT)

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-04: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer t

[regext] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02: (with COMMENT)

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer t

Re: [regext] EXTENDED: Re: CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-loffredo-regext-rdap-jcard-deprecation-03

Hi, I support adoption of this document and will continue to contribute to it. G. > On 10 Feb 2021, at 19:33, James Galvin wrote: > > The Chairs would like to extend this CALL FOR ADOPTION because we’d like to > separate out an issue that has come up in the discussion of this adoption. > We

[regext] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02

Reviewer: Stefan Santesson Review result: Ready This document appears to be ready and well written. >From a security point of view this document does not have much to review as security services related to this protocol is handled by a separate document (Security Services for the Registration Dat